Steve Jobs on the "iPod of reading"

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Perhaps Mr. Jobs should have been a little more specific. The market he <targets> does not read.

I think that's the key: Apple has never gone after readers... they've gone after watchers, listeners and creators, their mantra has centered around multimedia and pop. Reading is simply outside of their area of expertise, so to them, it doesn't even exist.

On the other hand, if they ever put out an iNewton, and someone designs an e-book reading app for it, I bet they won't put up too much of a fight over porting it to their device and making a few more bucks on something that "no one does."

[Xenophon]

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

First of all despite Mr. Jobs' recent excellent (and well deserved) press, let us not forget that he almost drove Apple into bankrupcy and Apple had to be helped to survive by (gasp) Bill Gates with a timely cash infusion.

SNIP

Um... BZZZZZT!!! Actually, Apple was doing pretty well when Bill Gates invested in them. The Gates put in about $100 million, at a time when Apple was profitable, had no debt, and had...


...wait for it...

$5 BILLION in the bank!


Bill Gates' "timely cash infusion" was a face-saving part of making a deal to settle outstanding patent disputes (Microsoft paid Apple something upwards of $1billion over a couple of years), promise to keep developing Office for the Mac for at least 5 years, and (oh yeah) invest $100 million in Apple.

Not a rescue, though.

Xenophon

[CCDMan]

I don't believe that the future of reading for pleasure is dead but there is a large section of our population who do not share a love of reading.

Indeed. There is a large segment that is into anything that is simple and easy. Simple TV, Simple Movies, Simple Religion, Simple Politics. Anything that avoids too much thought or mental effort. Sad but True. One reason I use Menken's quote as a sig.

[yvanleterrible]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

I think that's the key: Apple has never gone after readers... they've gone after watchers, listeners and creators, their mantra has centered around multimedia and pop. Reading is simply outside of their area of expertise, so to them, it doesn't even exist.

On the other hand, if they ever put out an iNewton, and someone designs an e-book reading app for it, I bet they won't put up too much of a fight over porting it to their device and making a few more bucks on something that "no one does."

But there is something absolutely wrong in the way aPple treats text. Reading can be done with an iPhone and an iPod, it is proven. They blatantly went out of their way to castrate texts to ridiculous lengths... 4k; its the longest you can have them in Notes. There has to be something major behind such a decision. It can not be of ignorance, they are learned.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by yvanleterrible

But there is something absolutely wrong in the way aPple treats text. Reading can be done with an iPhone and an iPod, it is proven. They blatantly went out of their way to castrate texts to ridiculous lengths... 4k; its the longest you can have them in Notes. There has to be something major behind such a decision. It can not be of ignorance, they are learned.

That's simply because they didn't expect anyone within their right mind to use Notes for anything other than... notes. It's not a book-dedicated app. There should be one in there, besides Notes.

[Mambo]

Originally Posted by yvanleterrible

But there is something absolutely wrong in the way aPple treats text. Reading can be done with an iPhone and an iPod, it is proven. They blatantly went out of their way to castrate texts to ridiculous lengths... 4k; its the longest you can have them in Notes. There has to be something major behind such a decision. It can not be of ignorance, they are learned.

C'mon, if there would be a reading app in iPod, everybody here would complain that it's useless, because LCD hurts your eyes and all you want is eink.

Most of the people here just can't be pleased. You can find fault in everything if you want.

[Mycropht]

When we take a look at the history of the book reading part of humanity, it is obvious that the percentage was never very high. Why, it was exactly zero before the first book was made. Today, I believe the percentage is relatively high, surely higher than in the 17th century. I do not fear for the future of reading. In this case, we have to consider just who has said that the people do not read anymore. It is entirely possible that Jobs who has achieved so much also has missed some things. Maybe he has never experienced the joy of reading a fictional novel, something which is not a technical manual or a book on methods of making more more money out of money. If that is the case, I pity him.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

That said it doesn't mean there's no market for ebooks. It simply means the market isn't as broad as it might be for something like MP3 players. He's thinking in terms of numbers he can sell, & appears to be thinking Apple would be better off spending its development time on something else.

Precisely.

If Jobs doesn't think people read, he should ride a New York City subway some time. Lots of books in evidence, along with iPods. (You can read and listen at the same time...)

But meanwhile, he's looking for big numbers. He doesn't want to sell tens of thousands of a device -- he wants to sell millions. An iPod will get that sort of numbers. An ebook reader won't, at least at present.

Those unhappy at the prospect of no ebook reader from Apple should count their blessings. Given Apple's track record in product design, it would be very pretty, dead easy to use as long as you only wanted certain basic functionality, and defaulting to a proprietary ebook format only available through Apple.
______
Dennis

[Mambo]

I think you can not say that Jobs is jerk until amazon sells the 100 mth Kindle.

He is right in a sense. I don't read fiction for example. It's a complete waste of time (except a very few classics). I read non-fiction books for information and for things that you don't learn in school or people don't talk about in everyday conversations (unfortunately). I wouldn't call it reading, it's kind of researching.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by SpiderMatt

But ereaders aren't just for reading books. The Kindle markets newspaper and magazines. I download articles off the net for my Sony Reader all the time.

People are NOT going to be paying $300-$400 to read newspapers and magazines. Especially when the reading experience is better via the paper copies.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Mambo

He is right in a sense. I don't read fiction for example. It's a complete waste of time (except a very few classics). I read non-fiction books for information and for things that you don't learn in school or people don't talk about in everyday conversations (unfortunately). I wouldn't call it reading, it's kind of researching.

For you, maybe... there are plenty of us who enjoy reading fiction, including current novels, and have voracious appetites.

Besides, Jobs isn't taking into account magazine and periodical reading, which probably dwarfs the book industry in terms of amount of material read on a regular basis, and much of which is devoted to--wait for it--entertainment, multimedia, the very markets that Jobs favors. Much of periodical content is simply advertisement for other products (like movies, music, and computers). You'd think he'd see a use for that.

[bookwormfjl]

Originally Posted by sianon

Interesting comments by Job. I am often asked how I find time to read by those I work with (my friends tend to also be avid readers). these same people will sit around the lunch table devouring rubbish gossip magazines or talking about the latest trashy TV show. My reply to the time question is, switch off the TV and see how much additional time they then find themselves with. I don't believe that the future of reading for pleasure is dead but there is a large section of our population who do not share a love of reading.

You are exactly right! The leisure time is there. It's how you use it, whether watching TV ; surfing the entertainment webiste on the 'net to get the latest trash on celebrities or.........Reading!!!

[slayda]

Originally Posted by SpiderMatt

Define "success." JK Rowling is the only writer in the history of the world to become a billionaire (USD) from writing. She's also more widely read around the world than King.

But how much of that income came from the sell of books?

[Gogolo]

Jobs is simply wrong. Since alphabetization is as widespread as never in history, bookmarket is expanding. This also due to online bookmarket (not ebooks, but selling hard copies over online stores).
Gogolo

[Liviu_5]

Originally Posted by Xenophon

Um... BZZZZZT!!! Actually, Apple was doing pretty well when Bill Gates invested in them. The Gates put in about $100 million, at a time when Apple was profitable, had no debt, and had...


...wait for it...

$5 BILLION in the bank!


Bill Gates' "timely cash infusion" was a face-saving part of making a deal to settle outstanding patent disputes (Microsoft paid Apple something upwards of $1billion over a couple of years), promise to keep developing Office for the Mac for at least 5 years, and (oh yeah) invest $100 million in Apple.

Not a rescue, though.

Xenophon

Well, the markets had a different opinion about Apple when Microsoft invested those money (of course it was not a rescue per se, just a vote of confidence that Apple will not go down). The company was in the red - again it does not matter if you have reserves in the bank, the markets want profitability and growth since reserves evaporate quickly otherwise, the stock was going nowhere - was pretty much flat from ~1987 to 1998, then it went up in the bubble, then back down to 1987 levels until 2003/4 and only then it took off.

I remember very well the financial commentary at the time and Microsoft move was clearly viewed as reassurance to investors.

Today Apple is an extraordinarily successful company, but then it was regarded as an also ran due especially to early decisions (in which Mr. Jobs had lots of input) not to license their OS. Of course nobody knew about iPods and mp3's then, how they will take the world by storm.

So my original comments were not meant as an insult and I respect Apple and Mr. Jobs a lot, however it does not mean that we gotta take his words as prophecy

As an aside, this episode (Microsoft putting money in Apple) is a good example of how quickly fortunes reverse in the market, since in the late 90's when Apple's stock was stagnant to down and Microsoft was going up and up exponentially, nobody would have bet that by 2008, Apple's stock will be about 10 (1000%) times higher, while Microsoft would be roughly about 50% lower from its highest level and just about where it was in 1998.